|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jun 23, 2009 8:17:00 GMT -5
Well, as movie sets they ought to be judged more by how they worked on film than how they look "in person." I thought the Wayne set impressive at the time and it gave us the best look at what the place really looked like up to that time. I thought the 2004 film didn't actually show the fort very much; there seemed to be a lot of close ups and interiors, which reflected more concern with the individuals than the fort or the physical space. Honestly, I don't recall getting much of a feel for what that set looked like from watching the film.
As to a sense of siege, desperation and doom, I still think the original Disney "Davy Crockett at the Alamo" TV program did that more effectively than any of the other films. I'm still impressed with that program, despite the inaccurate set and the relatively low-budget production.
AW
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Jun 23, 2009 12:32:57 GMT -5
I'll agree with Allen, the sets should be judged on how they worked on film. And, in that case I think they both worked pretty well.
I loved the detail in the 2004 set, and except for the very obvious flaws, it showed a lot of the compound as never seen before eg the lunette.
The thing about the Wayne set - especially after the Price of Freedom makeover, is when you visit it, even though it's still much smaller than the historic Alamo, you get a real feel for the problems Travis faced, and it's pretty easy to imagine and place some of the missing details - the kitchen and lunette for example.
When a few of us visited the set a few years ago Jim and I were able to stand on the "North Battery" and really discuss the battle and details we couldn't see before.
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Jun 24, 2009 13:40:52 GMT -5
When a few of us visited the set a few years ago Jim and I were able to stand on the "North Battery" and really discuss the battle and details we couldn't see before. Do it every day with tourist, and often with 4th. and 7th. grade Texas history classes -- no dull questions there! Yes, the Waynamo is the best "visual aid" going.
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Jun 24, 2009 14:18:23 GMT -5
I thought the 2004 film didn't actually show the fort very much; there seemed to be a lot of close ups and interiors, which reflected more concern with the individuals than the fort or the physical space. Honestly, I don't recall getting much of a feel for what that set looked like from watching the film. A disappointment to me as well. Having been involved in Michael Corenblith's passion for that set -- and his awesome results with accuracy (other than the obvious) and mood, it disappointed me to see the post-production and big studio process choices stress "closer and tighter" rather than "wider and grander." Indeed, the choice did lay somewhat in the original concept to make this a character and story film rather than a "cast of thousands" epic, but part of that original concept was *the setting as one of the principal characters,* and that is what got lost in the shuffle IMO. As to a sense of siege, desperation and doom, I still think the original Disney "Davy Crockett at the Alamo" TV program did that more effectively than any of the other films. I'm still impressed with that program, despite the inaccurate set and the relatively low-budget production. AW What I have always found "way cool" about the Davy Crockett at the Alamo episode (and you must watch the episode rather than the feature film to get this) is the way the director shows the concept of "overwhealming" with only 200 extras as both armies and on a 200 foot indoor set. First assault: Soldados run to the wall with ladders, ladders are pushed down and they run back after a first volley. Georgie yells, "They almost caught us with our britches flappin'." (40 seconds) Second assault: Daylight. They attack the wall with ladders, place them and climb. Soldados get to the tops and are beaten back with rifle butts and pistol shots. None come over. Ladders are pushed down and they run for cover. "We're holdin' 'em!" (1 min. - 11 sec.) Third assault: They charge in from a different direction, place ladders and climb them. Then there are a number of scenes repeating this motion, always up up up up up up. They get battered down. More up up up up up. Then some optically flipped scenes making it look like the north and east walls are being attacked as well as the south and west walls. Up up up up. Beat them down. Up up over up over up over over over over. Beat one or two down. Over over. Fight them inside the walls. "They've breached the north wall! Let's swing the cannon!" Soldados charge into the court from a new direction (same two set walls; reversed angles). Now something new (completely new to a television series). The sidekicks get wiped out one by one -- even the beloved Georgie!!! Then Davy's there alone, and they're still coming. WHAT MORE NEEDS TO BE SAID? (4 min. - 20 sec.) Awesome stuff, really. And yes, never captured the same way again.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jun 24, 2009 20:12:27 GMT -5
You nailed it, Rich! That's it exactly. I think seeing the sidekicks go down, especially Georgie, suddenly shocked us in our still-innocent youth; we had been raised on Gabby Hayes and Smiley Burnette - sidekicks didn't die! Let alone the hero! What the heck was happening here???
I have to admit, I had never really noticed that many of those battle shots were flipped film, but it makes perfect sense and it really worked.
And, yes, you really have to own that complete DVD set with the full TV episodes to appreciate this. I understand it's out of circulation now, but maybe still available on eBay or iOffer; if I had known that Disney was going to discontinue it so quickly, I'd have ordered 2 copies, just to be on the safe side.
Thanks for the excellent insight and for bringing this to life again!
AW
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Jul 5, 2009 7:16:26 GMT -5
Man, you really did bring me back to a place and time. I was pretty young -- maybe 6 or 7 years old, when these episodes aired for the first time. I might have been young but you never expected the "hero" or "side kicks" to die. I was stunned! I couldn't believe "the good guys" lost. I expected to see another episode and Davy and Georgie would be back sharing more adventures after winning the fight at The Alamo. lol
This was the first I heard about this "Alamo" place. Been hooked on it ever since, and I just turned 60. Disney and Fess planted a seed for a life-long passion of mine.
Never been to Dripping Springs, but have been to Alamo Village. I guess the Dripping Springs set is fading away fast, but I'd sure like to see it someday before it crumbles to plaster dust.
Paul
|
|
|
Post by Phil Riordan on Jul 5, 2009 8:32:07 GMT -5
A friend of mine spent two tours of duty in Viet Nam and was involved in several intense fire fights. He has often told me that for his money, "Davy Crockett at the Alamo" is the Alamo film which most accurately depicts a combat situation: "During battle, you're not aware of the scope of the event. Only your own perimeter. 'Davy Crockett' had that kind of a feel to it - the intensity and the personal experience of fighting for your life."
Whether by design or (perhaps) due to budget constraints, Norman Foster and the Disney people ended up creating a cinematic battle situation that was very personal, and very memorable. If I hadn't seen it since I was nine, I would still remember it. "They're on us!"
|
|
|
Post by bobdurham on Jul 5, 2009 20:08:34 GMT -5
The Disney film still holds up well. I showed it to my four year old grandson, never expecting it to hold his interest. To my surprise, he loves it -- has watched it several times and I've turned a whole new generation on to coonskin hats and refighting the Alamo battle in the back yard.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Jul 5, 2009 21:21:50 GMT -5
Y'know -- I need to track a copy of this one down. I haven't seen it since I was a kid, but it's still as vivid as yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jul 6, 2009 8:13:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by billchemerka on Jul 6, 2009 8:58:18 GMT -5
I showed "Davy Crockett at the Alamo" to my high school students for many years: in 1975 and from 1977 to 2002 [the 1976 16mm rental was doubled in 1976 due to the Bicentennial!].
During some school years, I had a couple of U.S. History I classes and on others I had four sections. So I was viewing this four times a day! Never tired of it. These teens (from various decades) thoroughly enjoyed it. And, surprisingly enough, there were a number of students who teared up at the end of the episode. "Davy Crockett at the Alamo" was part of a unit on "Westward Expansion" with all appropriate pre and post lessons tied in with it. One year, several dozen students asked if they could return after school to see the episode again. Instead of a classroom, we went into G-56, a windowless theater-style room with a large screen. Awesome.
Thanks to VHS and later DVD, the cumbersome rental process of 16mm film cans was eliminated.
The Alamo Society's Skip Malanowski was the uncredited editor of the Disney Treasures DVD. His account of the process, "Making the Davy Crockett DVD," appears in The Alamo Journal (Sept. 2002, #126). Skip's next project is "The Battle of Bunker Hill," a direct-to-DVD docudrama which will be released shortly.
[However, this is a John Wayne "Alamo" thread, so the next individual should bring this back to topic.]
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Aug 5, 2009 5:38:52 GMT -5
The other night, while my wife was watching something or another on the Game Network (God help me -- lol) I decided to plug in The John Wayne Alamo on my MacBook and give it a spin. I hadn't watched it in a couple of years and had been having the urge to see it again.
Despite the liberties Wayne and Company took with the story-telling, it still stands up as a pretty darn good movie. One has to wonder what Wayne (if he was still with us today) would do if he were to make this movie today, given the technological advances since he made his movie half a decade ago.
But some of those scenes still blow me away. Wayne had a vision and he didn't do such a bad job seeing it through.
Paul
|
|
|
Post by cougar on Aug 11, 2009 16:46:09 GMT -5
I know Wayne was one of the first people to think about adding a video camera to a film camera and using the first camera to get an immediate play back on a scene the second camera was filming. He said at the time the techical stuff would cost too much.
|
|
nybob
Full Member
Posts: 26
|
Post by nybob on Aug 19, 2009 16:49:54 GMT -5
Yesterday i happened to catch John Wayne's alamo on turner classic movie network. To me it still holds up. The movie was made in a grand if not totally accurate scale. One of the biggest differences for me between the 1960 and 2004 version is the acting. Although i really liked Billy Bob Thornton, Jason Patrick and Patrick Wilson could not compete with Richard Widmark and Laurence Harvey. When i saw the 2004 movie on the big screen two images stood out. During the final assault when you first see the long ominous mexican bayonet. The second is the overhead view of the battle showing the complete alamo compound. I also agree that more of this great set should have been shown in the 2004 film.
|
|
|
Post by jrboddie on Aug 19, 2009 18:26:49 GMT -5
I TiVoed the John Wayne version and am working my way through it--very long. My tolerance for John Wayne is too low to watch it all in one sitting.
And FYI, another Alamo movie is on this month: The Last Command (1955) is showing on TCM on August 22 at 6 pm (time zone unknown).
|
|